|
Post by goldsaint17 on Dec 28, 2017 10:37:11 GMT -5
Wow- more threads all over the place. Haters and “fluffers” out in full force Current recruits- yes JP has a few nice recruits on the “line” can he land them? His track record is not good in competitive situations, so I would say doubtful, he usually drops down to his plan b or sometimes plan C or D recruits. But to say his current recruits have no offers is non informed Wojcik- not concerned about his offers he was early commit. How many offers did Rob Poole have? My main concern about Wojcik is his speed, to be truthful is looks slow, I’ll withhold judgement till he gets here. To be claiming he will take Richards role before kid even gets here is talking like a JP fluffer What was Rob Poole's ranking. Poole like others McCaffery recruited, was in that sweet spot of 200-500. The recruits we have seen under this administration are in the 700+ - unknown range. Jake Wojcik is ranked 385 overall and the number 81 shooting guard on 247sports.
|
|
|
Post by SaintsFan on Dec 28, 2017 12:01:30 GMT -5
What was Rob Poole's ranking. Poole like others McCaffery recruited, was in that sweet spot of 200-500. The recruits we have seen under this administration are in the 700+ - unknown range. Jake Wojcik is ranked 385 overall and the number 81 shooting guard on 247sports. two * on Wojcik * - Committed last year, before the others could get involved. I would congratulate Patsos on that if it wasnt for * number 2 * - Obviously family ties to Patsos and Loyola etc. He does ok when he has an "in" like this. Blind recruiting... not so much. This has been discussed often out here. Lets see how it all works out.
|
|
|
Post by goldsaint17 on Dec 28, 2017 12:06:41 GMT -5
Jake Wojcik is ranked 385 overall and the number 81 shooting guard on 247sports. two * on Wojcik * - Committed last year, before the others could get involved. I would congratulate Patsos on that if it wasnt for * number 2 * - Obviously family ties to Patsos and Loyola etc. He does ok when he has an "in" like this. Blind recruiting... not so much. This has been discussed often out here. Lets see how it all works out. Fair, but if we were comparing Wojcik to Poole (who was fully recruited by MB by the way given that MB had been HC for 2 years before Poole arrived), I thought Jake’s ranking deserved mention there. Also, Jake was locked up before he was a well-regarded prospect, have to think some credit is due there for our staff.
|
|
Quackman
Team Captain
Posts: 2,472
Dislikes:
|
Post by Quackman on Dec 28, 2017 12:14:39 GMT -5
two * on Wojcik * - Committed last year, before the others could get involved. I would congratulate Patsos on that if it wasnt for * number 2 * - Obviously family ties to Patsos and Loyola etc. He does ok when he has an "in" like this. Blind recruiting... not so much. This has been discussed often out here. Lets see how it all works out. Fair, but if we were comparing Wojcik to Poole (who was fully recruited by MB by the way given that MB had been HC for 2 years before Poole arrived), I thought Jake’s ranking deserved mention there. Also, Jake was locked up before he was a well-regarded prospect, have to think some credit is due there for our staff. Don't you get it, these guys are not going to give JP any credit for anything. It doesn't fit their narrative.
|
|
|
Post by SaintsFan on Dec 28, 2017 12:50:55 GMT -5
Fair, but if we were comparing Wojcik to Poole (who was fully recruited by MB by the way given that MB had been HC for 2 years before Poole arrived), I thought Jake’s ranking deserved mention there. Also, Jake was locked up before he was a well-regarded prospect, have to think some credit is due there for our staff. Don't you get it, these guys are not going to give JP any credit for anything. It doesn't fit their narrative. The current narrative is LOSER. That seems to be an acceptable narrative to you. /golf clap Few if any recruits have been signed with any significant competition for them. Seems Wojcik is perhaps the highest rated and it took signing him a year ahead of schedule AND the father having played for and worked for Patsos. The only words that matter... The results speak for this coaching staff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2017 13:09:51 GMT -5
Evan Fisher was also a 3 star recruit. I was against that from day one because he looked like he'd struggle on defense and he seemed like a redundant player. I wanted a rim protector with that scholarship and with Bisping, WB, Long, and Wolfe already on board as face up 4's..we needed another tough interior big to replace Silas...not another soft big who was more concerned with shooting 3's. Instead we got Fisher...and here we are...soft in the middle...exactly as I worried about at the time.
Wojcik could be history repeating itself as he, again, brings a specialized skill that we already have..may struggle on D due to speed...and doesn't bring much that the team doesn't already have. It feels a little like Fisher all over again.
|
|
|
Post by goldsaint17 on Dec 28, 2017 13:21:28 GMT -5
Evan Fisher was also a 3 star recruit. I was against that from day one because he looked like he'd struggle on defense and he seemed like a redundant player. I wanted a rim protector with that scholarship and with Bisping, WB, Long, and Wolfe already on board as face up 4's..we needed another tough interior big to replace Silas...not another soft big who was more concerned with shooting 3's. Instead we got Fisher...and here we are...soft in the middle...exactly as I worried about at the time. Wojcik could be history repeating itself as he, again, brings a specialized skill that we already have..may struggle on D due to speed...and doesn't bring much that the team doesn't already have. It feels a little like Fisher all over again. The best always rises to the top. If Jake is as good a shooter as we think he is, can handle and distribute the way I think he can, and lead a team, he’s going to get on the floor and be a very good player for us. If he’s too slow to defend and does nothing more than be a spot-up shooter, he’ll sit on the bench. I think he has the craftiness to be a scoring shooter ala Shane Richards or Poole, and having a guy out there who can hit from anywhere and doesn’t make mistakes as well as have the ability to get to the rim and finish in midrange is super valuable. But it’s possible he’s Kinnon LaRose. We’ll see.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Dislikes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2017 13:56:16 GMT -5
Evan Fisher was also a 3 star recruit. I was against that from day one because he looked like he'd struggle on defense and he seemed like a redundant player. I wanted a rim protector with that scholarship and with Bisping, WB, Long, and Wolfe already on board as face up 4's..we needed another tough interior big to replace Silas...not another soft big who was more concerned with shooting 3's. Instead we got Fisher...and here we are...soft in the middle...exactly as I worried about at the time. Wojcik could be history repeating itself as he, again, brings a specialized skill that we already have..may struggle on D due to speed...and doesn't bring much that the team doesn't already have. It feels a little like Fisher all over again. The best always rises to the top. If Jake is as good a shooter as we think he is, can handle and distribute the way I think he can, and lead a team, he’s going to get on the floor and be a very good player for us. If he’s too slow to defend and does nothing more than be a spot-up shooter, he’ll sit on the bench. I think he has the craftiness to be a scoring shooter ala Shane Richards or Poole, and having a guy out there who can hit from anywhere and doesn’t make mistakes as well as have the ability to get to the rim and finish in midrange is super valuable. But it’s possible he’s Kinnon LaRose. We’ll see. He very well could be an undersized Shane Richards...but, even at an inch or 2 taller, he wasn't very good on D or the boards either...and had a negative assist ratio. That rebounding would put Shane closer to Khalil Richard than any of our other guards. While that may be a solid player..if other quicker, more athletic guys are already shooting 37%+ from three and rebounding better...why would he play over them with them being more experienced? And if you don't play in your 1st couple years under Patsos...most likely you never will. Poole rebounded very well and was 6-6. That made him more versatile and valuable.
|
|
|
Post by goldsaint17 on Dec 28, 2017 14:26:38 GMT -5
The best always rises to the top. If Jake is as good a shooter as we think he is, can handle and distribute the way I think he can, and lead a team, he’s going to get on the floor and be a very good player for us. If he’s too slow to defend and does nothing more than be a spot-up shooter, he’ll sit on the bench. I think he has the craftiness to be a scoring shooter ala Shane Richards or Poole, and having a guy out there who can hit from anywhere and doesn’t make mistakes as well as have the ability to get to the rim and finish in midrange is super valuable. But it’s possible he’s Kinnon LaRose. We’ll see. He very well could be an undersized Shane Richards...but, even at an inch or 2 taller, he wasn't very good on D or the boards either...and had a negative assist ratio. That rebounding would put Shane closer to Khalil Richard than any of our other guards. While that may be a solid player..if other quicker, more athletic guys are already shooting 37%+ from three and rebounding better...why would he play over them with them being more experienced? And if you don't play in your 1st couple years under Patsos...most likely you never will. Poole rebounded very well and was 6-6. That made him more versatile and valuable. I think you make some valid points, but to suggest that Shane Richards wouldn’t have been that useful to us seems a bit of an overstatement. Who are we counting on to be quicker and more athletic? Richard, who turns the ball over a bunch and doesn’t always play within the offense? Horn, who is a good shooter but hasn’t shown the ability yet to get his own look, or recruits who may or may not shoot well like Johnson and Welch (haven’t seen Johnson’s shooting numbers in prep but Welch seems streaky like Nico). I confess I haven’t seen enough of Jake to make a full conclusion, but I’m not sure anyone has. I do know that the “honorable mention All-State” in California on MaxPreps had 15 players on it. One is at Cal now, 1 is at Kentucky, 2 are at UCLA, one is verbally committed to UNLV, one is verbally committed to Cincinnati, one is LaMelo Ball. (side note, kind of amazing that all those guys are just honorable mention) The rest are either committed/offered to or already at mid-major programs. One of those kids is Jake Wojcik. He’s a much more decorated recruit (and not just by 1 recruiting source that gave him a 3-Star grade by seeing him play twice-Sorry Evan Fisher) in his area and state-wide. His team went 25-3 last season in a tough league and he was the only D1 player on the roster.
|
|
hoopjunkie
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 12,506
Dislikes:
|
Post by hoopjunkie on Dec 28, 2017 14:31:08 GMT -5
Jake is no savior believe me. He's smart, knows how to play and can really shoot it. He's probably 6'3" and has a handle good enough to be the 2nd best PG on our team right now.
|
|
Quackman
Team Captain
Posts: 2,472
Dislikes:
|
Post by Quackman on Dec 28, 2017 14:34:15 GMT -5
Don't you get it, these guys are not going to give JP any credit for anything. It doesn't fit their narrative. The current narrative is LOSER. That seems to be an acceptable narrative to you. /golf clap Few if any recruits have been signed with any significant competition for them. Seems Wojcik is perhaps the highest rated and it took signing him a year ahead of schedule AND the father having played for and worked for Patsos. The only words that matter... The results speak for this coaching staff. See, that's the issue. JP has been the epitome of mediocre (which is an issue), loser is not how I would describe his tenure. Beyer and Mitch were losers. Lanier was better than mediocre to start and then lost control of the program. Given the expectations for the program going into JP year one, it is revisionist history to say that year was anything but a success. I seem to recall many (including yourself) predicting 5 or less wins. When you beat expectations by 15 games that is a successful season. Year two sucked but losing Bisping was a major downer. Year three was pretty good especially given the injury to Wright. Year four was a struggle and the team took way too long to come together but they still ended up in the MAAC final and a free throw from the tournament. I have said it before, I am neither a fluffer or a hater. I'd like to let the season play out and then look back to see where the program stands. I get that fans don't like his personality and demeanor. I understand that many don't like him as the face of the program. But it begs a question ... if Patsos is such a bad recruiter, how does he achieve mediocre to good results throughout his coaching career? I see many saying that he is horrible in game coach, does little to prepare his players and is so bad to the kids in the program that they run away. So which is it, either he is recruiting D2 talent as you say ... which would have to make him a killer game coach given the results. Or, he is a better at evaluating/recognizing talent than he is given credit for but a horrible game coach? I just don't think a guy who was able to win at, as HJ put it, the Cleveland Browns of D1 basketball and has achieved, at worst, mediocrity at Siena is both a horrible recruiter and a horrible game coach. Asking for a friend.
|
|
Quackman
Team Captain
Posts: 2,472
Dislikes:
|
Post by Quackman on Dec 28, 2017 14:36:28 GMT -5
Jake is no savior believe me. He's smart, knows how to play and can really shoot it. He's probably 6'3" and has a handle good enough to be the 2nd best PG on our team right now. I don't think he has to be a savior. What team can't use a knockdown shooter? Again, if he is a smart player who can defend/rebound his position reasonably well while being a good enough shooter that other teams have to worry about where he is on the court, he'll find a way on the court. If it isn't year one, so be it.
|
|
|
Post by MTS on Dec 28, 2017 14:59:49 GMT -5
The current narrative is LOSER. That seems to be an acceptable narrative to you. /golf clap Few if any recruits have been signed with any significant competition for them. Seems Wojcik is perhaps the highest rated and it took signing him a year ahead of schedule AND the father having played for and worked for Patsos. The only words that matter... The results speak for this coaching staff. See, that's the issue. JP has been the epitome of mediocre (which is an issue), loser is not how I would describe his tenure. Beyer and Mitch were losers. Lanier was better than mediocre to start and then lost control of the program. Given the expectations for the program going into JP year one, it is revisionist history to say that year was anything but a success. I seem to recall many (including yourself) predicting 5 or less wins. When you beat expectations by 15 games that is a successful season. Year two sucked but losing Bisping was a major downer. Year three was pretty good especially given the injury to Wright. Year four was a struggle and the team took way too long to come together but they still ended up in the MAAC final and a free throw from the tournament. I have said it before, I am neither a fluffer or a hater. I'd like to let the season play out and then look back to see where the program stands. I get that fans don't like his personality and demeanor. I understand that many don't like him as the face of the program. But it begs a question ... if Patsos is such a bad recruiter, how does he achieve mediocre to good results throughout his coaching career? I see many saying that he is horrible in game coach, does little to prepare his players and is so bad to the kids in the program that they run away. So which is it, either he is recruiting D2 talent as you say ... which would have to make him a killer game coach given the results. Or, he is a better at evaluating/recognizing talent than he is given credit for but a horrible game coach? I just don't think a guy who was able to win at, as HJ put it, the Cleveland Browns of D1 basketball and has achieved, at worst, mediocrity at Siena is both a horrible recruiter and a horrible game coach. Asking for a friend. I don't think anyone said JP was completely awful but just very mediocre (hence the nickname so-so Jimbo). Siena should strive to be better. While it's not his fault the previous three years to his arrive has caused a lot of angst. Siena is now 8 years from being a truly good team. Siena should be competing with Iona not be happy being a .500 program.
|
|
Quackman
Team Captain
Posts: 2,472
Dislikes:
|
Post by Quackman on Dec 28, 2017 15:18:42 GMT -5
See, that's the issue. JP has been the epitome of mediocre (which is an issue), loser is not how I would describe his tenure. Beyer and Mitch were losers. Lanier was better than mediocre to start and then lost control of the program. Given the expectations for the program going into JP year one, it is revisionist history to say that year was anything but a success. I seem to recall many (including yourself) predicting 5 or less wins. When you beat expectations by 15 games that is a successful season. Year two sucked but losing Bisping was a major downer. Year three was pretty good especially given the injury to Wright. Year four was a struggle and the team took way too long to come together but they still ended up in the MAAC final and a free throw from the tournament. I have said it before, I am neither a fluffer or a hater. I'd like to let the season play out and then look back to see where the program stands. I get that fans don't like his personality and demeanor. I understand that many don't like him as the face of the program. But it begs a question ... if Patsos is such a bad recruiter, how does he achieve mediocre to good results throughout his coaching career? I see many saying that he is horrible in game coach, does little to prepare his players and is so bad to the kids in the program that they run away. So which is it, either he is recruiting D2 talent as you say ... which would have to make him a killer game coach given the results. Or, he is a better at evaluating/recognizing talent than he is given credit for but a horrible game coach? I just don't think a guy who was able to win at, as HJ put it, the Cleveland Browns of D1 basketball and has achieved, at worst, mediocrity at Siena is both a horrible recruiter and a horrible game coach. Asking for a friend. I don't think anyone said JP was completely awful but just very mediocre (hence the nickname so-so Jimbo). Siena should strive to be better. While it's not his fault the previous three years to his arrive has caused a lot of angst. Siena is now 8 years from being a truly good team. Siena should be competing with Iona not be happy being a .500 program. That's the thing Mike, look at SF's response post that I was responding to where he refers to JP as a loser and he isn't the only one who takes that position. I agree with you that his tenure has resulted in so so results.
|
|
gorvy
Associate Head Coach
Posts: 10,021
Dislikes:
|
Post by gorvy on Dec 28, 2017 16:15:18 GMT -5
I’m not big on recruiting but I would say he is a good recruiter not as good in game coach. Although... he did win the cbi which I enjoyed more than most on here. I’ll also say that he has wasted some slots on questionable decisions (example gottfried). Perhaps a good evaluator of talent but not so good at managing the roster. He’s a mixed bag all around which is part of the problem for me.
|
|